Taylor & anor v Smith & anor [2014] NSWLEC 1088

Taylor & anor v Smith & anor [2014] NSWLEC 1088

Part 2A applied to the 13 Leyland Cypress trees because they formed a hedge over 2.5m, but not to the potted bamboo because it was not planted with the other trees so as to form a hedge. Trees 10-13 severely obstructed sunlight to the ground floor family room and kitchen windows, and the applicants' interest in winter solar access outweighed the respondents' privacy concerns. A pruning height of 1.5m above the dividing fence was sufficient to remedy the severe sunlight obstruction, while pruning to 1.2m or additional pruning for views was not justified.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application upheld in part.
Legal Topics
['hedge Pruning' 'severe Obstruction of Sunlight' 'severe Obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'part 2 a Jurisdictional Requirements']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'land and Environment' 'residential Amenity'] ['hedge Pruning' 'severe Obstruction of Sunlight' 'severe Obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'part 2 a Jurisdictional Requirements']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Under S14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Leyland Cypress trees and potted bamboo were trees to which Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied.' "Whether the respondents' Leyland Cypress trees severely obstructed sunlight to windows of the applicants' dwelling." "Whether the severity and nature of the obstruction meant the applicants' interest in pruning outweighed matters suggesting the undesirability of interfering with the trees, including the respondents' privacy." "Whether the respondents' Leyland Cypress trees severely obstructed views from the applicants' dwelling."]

Ratio Decidendi

Part 2A applied to the 13 Leyland Cypress trees because they formed a hedge over 2.5m, but not to the potted bamboo because it was not planted with the other trees so as to form a hedge. Trees 10-13 severely obstructed sunlight to the ground floor family room and kitchen windows, and the applicants' interest in winter solar access outweighed the respondents' privacy concerns. A pruning height of 1.5m above the dividing fence was sufficient to remedy the severe sunlight obstruction, while pruning to 1.2m or additional pruning for views was not justified.

Court Disposition

Application upheld in part.

Orders

  • ['The application is upheld in part.' 'Within 30 days of the date of these orders, the respondents, at their expense, are to have the row of 13 Leyland Cypress trees on their rear southern boundary pruned to a height of 1.5m above the timber dividing fence.' 'The applicants are to provide all reasonable access on...